tv [untitled] October 1, 2014 8:00pm-8:31pm PDT
funds for additional projects for vision zero, we would love an update on the items funded on the june process of this fiscal year. and sfta will provide project zero and other items, thank you, mrs. hunter. >> as we discussed at previous meetingin meetings and task force there are 24 projects in 24 months. we will still on target for doing that. we have eight projects already complete. we have approximately three projects in each district. we have identified the funding
for the 24 projects. the total roll-up of the 40 that we have identified is $21 million. and in your packet we've gone through and identified them, there is a map of them. as well as -- and there are also extra copies of what you found in your packet at the door. the scope, schedule and budgets for all 40 projects. and a project manager has been assigned to all of these. and then at the very back to address the add-back projects. those have been identified as district specific projects and city-wide projects that will be using add-back funding from
supervisors. any questions of specific projects? >> is that the entiratioe presentation? >> this is just a summary of your packet. we could go through the specific projects. >> yes, i would like a status report on all 40, and where the project is, and the eight completed and the time line for the 16 others and the budget process. sorry i went through this in the introduction. >> okay, wasn't sure you wanted to go through every single one. >> yes. >> okay. the eight projects that is complete, we did curb extensions and lines at 6th and howard.
that is district 6. i will start with the complete ones. >> that one came before we called the vision zero, i couldn't call that part of the 24. that was identified by the office and funded through the office budget and the mayor supplemented that. >> okay, i can discuss that with our engineering group. another project that we have completed. that was completed in april, 2014. and then just this past june, we completed the green wave along fulton street, from laguna to steiner. a couple of projects, sunset boulevard, both completed in july. a reduction of speed limit and a
replacement of the flashing beacon on sunset. along columbus avenue just completed this month, from howell to union, we installed two bus bulbs. in june, on kearney street, we removed the tow lane from jackson to washington. this may, this past may, market street to buchanan street there were bicycle section crossing treatments. in july a new traffic signal at mason masonic. and union terrace. those are the eight that have been completed. and then if we want to just run
through each of them. that are underway. >> mrs. hunter, can i say that, that traffic signal at union, terrace and way predated vision zero, and targeted funding for that and residents worked on that quite a while. i don't know if you should include that in zero vision projects just as supervisor kim mentioned. >> sorry, may i have misspoken. that was masonic. >> yes, and union terrace that helped to fund it, and calmed the traffic but way predated vision zero, going on for years. >> commissioner yee. >> this begs the question, maybe what we need is a better definition of what we consider a
vision-zero project. it seems like there is different definitions floating around right now. >> yeah. >> if i may. the co-chair of the vision zero task force for the city. i think what is happening here, you are right, we met with some supervisors and some definitions of what is vision zero project, and maybe they were in planning before we officially adopted vision zero. we had the executive session in 2010. these are leading towards that, and we have an update coming up on the status of the education outreach program that we are working on. to clearly define what vision zero is as a city policy. and identify the projects supporting vision zero and the
support of these 24 projects. yeah, there is some that were clearly in the planning before we officially said, this is the vision zero resolution to the city. but we think they are consistent as they are in the corridors and addressing a specific safety issue. that's why they are included. but i hear your comment. >> yeah, i think there needs to be better clarity. we weren't clear in what we considered part of the vision zero 24, and that's the purpose of this committee to verify policy. and it's good to get updates and requests of what went in making our city safety, vision zero wasn't the beginning of pedestrian safety here in san francisco, but it would be great to differentiate those out of the 24 projects. >> sure, we will take that. >> commissioner yee. >> in sort of thinking but how you define this. for me anyways, if you had
something on track, and it was completion date had been projected 10 years from now. but because of vision zero you don't expedite it. i would consider that a project, because i have seen projects where the end date was several years out. and when i spoke to staff about the need to make it quicker. somehow they made it happen. and i think that's a plus for us. >> right. >> just to piggyback on what timothy was saying. the engineer subcommittee has been conveneing and in the process of developing or drafted our two-year action strategy. among that is the engineering section, which will provide greater clarity on what we are
considering is a vision zero project. and exactly what you said, something that may have been in the works already but maybe expedited and could fall under something vision zero. all of our projects really do go through that safety lens. so we would like to say that all of our projects really do support vision zero. and we will be working with our communications group to define it for the public when we promote certain projects. that everything would support vision zero, but maybe something is branded vision zero, we hope to clarify that. >> thank you, and for the sake of my colleagues, i have this project detail, are you able to showcase that on the screen? i think it's hard to follow all the projects.
>> so page 4 of what i just handed you, i am not sure within your packet what page number it is. second project is in the design phase, and scheduled for completion in december of 2015. it's a conversion of ellis and eddie into two-way streets. project no. 4, calls for a road (inaudible) between polk and jones, and the date is beyond the period. we have a list of 40 projects, in the event that something has to shift, we can accelerate the
project. project 5-a and 5-b are on howard street. both in predevelopment, scheduled to be done first one restriping the bike lane buffer from sixth to 11th. and temporary corner balls, scheduled to complete this november, and next year a road diet from fourth to sixth. and we have a safer market street anticipating this summer, june, 2015, that includes turning restrictions for taxis and para-transit will still be allowed on market street, commercial vehicles, as well as extending the turning only lanes
for northbound traffic. and then we have polk street for day-lighting and colored curbs, scheduled in april of 2015. >> explain what you mean by signal retiming. what does that do specifically? >> for signal retiming and i apologize, i am not entirely certain on this particular project, but it could include ensuring we have proper crossing times for pedestrians. or to make sure that speeds are more appropriate. let's see here -- potrero avenue with striping and buffers for
the existing bike lanes. this project is slated to be completed after our january, 2016 deadline. moving on to page 5 in your packet. you will see a series of projects all numbered 10-a, b and c, along webster street. the first one, first item to be complete is addition of a buffer to the existing bike lane. preconstruction that should be completed in august, 2015. and two projects in predevelopment again and we expect that completion on october 2015, and that includes turns and additional pedestrian treatment at mcallister and
post. and no. 12, and the first one is in predevelopment, scheduled to be complete -- excuse me, september of 2015. those are bike intersection treatments as well as temporary bulbs and narrowing traffic lanes and daylighting. and the second part of that project we identified in legislation to be complete in june, 2015. and those are bicycle and pedestrian treatments. such as a buffered cycle track and temporary bulbs and new traffic controls. project no. 13, signal timing changes for pedestrian safety along 19th avenue from slope to
juna-parasara, in the design phase scheduled at the completion of this year. >> that's to extend the signals so that pedestrians have time to cross that wide boulevard? >> project 15, along geary boulevard will be pedestrian intersection treatments including temporary slating and bulbs, and that slated for june, 2016. >> through the chair. >> i have commissioner wiener first. my apologies for not looking. >> thank you for providing this, and i want to preface this by saying that i am not one of those people who thinks that when you have a pot of money, for transportation projects that you divide it by 11, in 11
districts. i believe in merit based, and need-based investments. so i do not fall in that, chop it up by 11, it's a bad way to do transit funding. that opinion doesn't prevail on the board of supervisors. but it's important. and i believe that the two districts that should get their share of investment, first district 6 and district 3. because it's on the merits, it seems that those districts that we have the most significant problems. and district 6 in particular, south of market where you have freeway s crisscrossing this neighborhood. with all of that said, i am looking at this and one thing that strikes me. so it's a $21 million so of investment. so district 8 receives a whopping 1% of that investment.
so again i am not in any suggesting it should be each of the 11 districts gets its percent. i want to district 6 and 3 to get their proportionate amount, and they should. and that strikes me extreme. and in district 4, the sunset has challenges, and district 4 is in the same boat as district 8, gets 1% of the total investment. again i am not advocating for some pure equity among the districts. but taking into account there will be disproportionate amount for 6 and 3, and there should be, but there has to be a rule of reason as well. and we have very significant needs in parts of district 8 as well, in terms of period safety. upper market, before my time, the incorrect decision was made
to excise west of octavioiia boulevard and that decision was made and with horrible circumstances. and with bulb outs, $200,000 is not enough to bulb out an intersection. and the problems of that intersection go beyond bulbs out, and it's a tragic disaster, there and others fall in that category as well. i could go on, but i am wondering in terms of how the decisions were made and how it could be that you have two districts that have pedestrian challenges and each are receiving a grand total of about 1% of the total funds allocated. >> sure. i should note that this is not
everything that we are actually doing. this was purely to identify the 24 projects in 24 months. this is not -- not represent. >> i understand, but obviously we are saying, we gave policy directed from the board that we need to be moving on these street safety projects. that they were going too slow. and in 24 months to really make a difference. and is t strikes me disproportionate. >> yes, i can understand that. one thing -- i am not prepared to speak to that exactly today. can i say one thing. some of the projects are incredibly effective and cost effective. something like daylighting will be very inexpensive. and very effective. so it will reflect a very small portion of the budget, but yet
incredibly effective. as opposed to streetscaping where we are widening a sidewalk, it was not identified in the walk-first as a safety treatment but very sensitive to do and that's where some funding goes. >> sure, and frustration on my part, upper market is a mess when it comes to pedestrians. i feel like we get a lot of lip service from city agencies of improving upper market and nothing happens. the only significant pedestrian improvement in upper market is the shortening of the crossing distance lower in market, that we were able to accomplish because a developer paid for it as in-kind impact fee and because we worked with the planning department to override
an attempted veto from the fire department and neighborhood association and got it through. and it's been a universally supported change. but other than that nothing has really happened. and it's a major frustration. and this list, in terms of what our priorities are, says to me that upper market is not a priority. >> jonathan ruse at the mta, i will try to address those comments. first overall the feedback we are getting back on this list is very good and important. i want to stress that we put "draft" all over it and it's a prototype and to have a discussion and a work plan to work through the projects. and the prioritization and the areas to focus on, those are important comments to get as part of this. i want to remind you
commissioners that salynna (inaudible) presented this two quarters ago, when we started this committee. so this is the list we are working off. >> this isn't the first time i have raised this issue, i have said it before privately and publicly. i am saying it in probably the starkest terms now, because i feel that my feedback has not been heard. and certainly not reflected. i don't know how many conversations i need to have with people about the needs of upper market and the mess in terms of traffic flow and the pedestrian needs. for to get through. >> no so that's good feedback to help how we frame this list. this list was meant to be a bucket of what we think that vision zero is. and it doesn't take away from the projects that we intend to fund in the upper market area. and working with the cac and we have a number of projects in the
planning stage that we are woking with the planning department. and the development in that area, we are setting aside mi millions of dollars for that area. the question, commissioner wiener, when you look at a vision zero project or data or effectiveness that mari is talking about. whether or not as a policy matter this committee wants to make that a definition. then we are happy to add the project. some of those things are funded. it's just moving one thing from one bucket and adding it to this list. i don't want you to get the sense that we don't think it's important. >> my concern i think it's wonderful and so important that we are saying that these are the projects we are prioritizing for a 24-month period. and that is good, because it holds the city family accountable, not just talk with it but deliver them in 24 months
and period, and end of story. when i look at a project that is happening supposedly in my district, the diamond embosswell area that is a mess. and tom (inaudible) obtained money for that list, we are in 2014 and no work has been done. and it drags on and on, and i don't know why it's not in construction. the concern whether or not there is an attempt to do something or the funding available. if it doesn't make it on the list that we hold ourselves accountable for a 24-month delivery. we see more diamond and bosworth and it continues even though the money is sitting there. that's my concern, i know that
the mta and the other agencies have the best intentions. and not disagreement of what needs to happen but to get the momentum to make them a reality. >> good feedback, and we will take that into consideration. and frame that and take into consideration, if you want updates on those projects, we will get you updates on those projects. i am getting a sense from the committee that you want to hold us accountable on this list, whether planned before or in the future, and we will go month by month and we may need your help to get resources or staffing. >> i don't want consideration, i would like a response today, and also district 4. i mean there are some terrible intersections there, and terrible streets, 19th avenue. and some overlap into district 7 and district 4 is also almost
absent from this list. >> we will get back. we will get back to that and come back with an appropriate set of lists for both districts. and have a discussion as a committee which projects you want to add or subplant off the existing list. because we want to deliver something in 24 months. >> thank you, and like i said, often in our office, we are a small office with four people. we think that we have the same understanding of words. and it's often helpful for us to check in and have the same agreement. i want to make mention that sixth and howard i brought up many times, and frustrated it's on the list. and i understand there is a change in staffing and she knew it wasn't appropriate to be on that list, and i understand a change in staffing. i realize there are some changes made, our work district group
made changes and add some things and subplant projects that our residents thought were a higher priority. i want to change the structure, mrs. hunter, instead of all 40, i think that everyone has had an opportunity to read through 40. and we will have an opportunity to ask questions and feedback, i have commissioner mar on the roster. >> thank you, chair kim, i am in agreement with chair breed. looking at the areas and key intersections with the most conflicts and accidents and deaths is critical. and being equitable from a city-wide level looking at these projects is very important. and i am sensitive to what supervisor wiener is saying to give something to each district. but to me it's looking at the most dangerous areas.
and on the list it's masonic and geary. and i am pleased that the small but significant traffic calming is important. but i don't want to knit pick or micro-manage, but item 15 isn't in district 5 at all, it should be just districts 1 and 2. and to supervisor wiener's point, district 2 has nothing on here, but the things on my list share in district 2. you have to include not only for 15, it's included and masonic and union terrace is district 1 and that's item 35. and 2. and item 36, geary and palm, is districts 1 and 2 as well from my understanding. thank you. >> commissioner breed. >> thank you, i just have a couple of comments. i appreciate supervisor wiener and supervisor mar's feedback on this in terms of relating accidents to how these projects
are determined. i think what i had expected when we talked about moving these projects forward is that we would have a clear understanding of the most dangerous intersections. and how they related to the project. i know there is a map here that shows us those particular areas. but i guess the challenge i am experiencing is trying to connect the projects to the map. so my expectation would be that we make sure that we are addressing those issues with some of the most dangerous intersections throughout our ci city, regardless of the district. and even looking at what is happening in my district. there are intersections they know for certain that are problematic that are not a part of the plan. and m